Altitude can be useful, but the purpose, exposure and cost to the rest of the training plan must be clear.
An altitude camp can look like an obvious step towards higher performance. It offers a dedicated environment, strong training partners and the possibility of physiological adaptation. Those advantages can make it difficult to separate the effect of altitude from the effect of a well-organised camp.
Before booking, answer a more useful question: what problem is the camp intended to solve? Preparing to compete at altitude and using altitude exposure to improve later sea-level performance are related but different goals.
Understand the main approaches
At natural altitude, lower atmospheric pressure reduces the partial pressure of oxygen. The proportion of oxygen in the air remains broadly the same. This makes a given running workload more demanding and can reduce the pace an athlete can sustain.
| Approach | Main idea | Practical trade-off |
|---|---|---|
| Live high, train high | Live and train in the altitude environment | Sustained exposure, with training intensity adjusted to the environment |
| Live high, train low | Live at altitude and perform some training lower down | Seek an exposure stimulus while preserving more training quality; travel and logistics matter |
| Intermittent hypoxic training | Selected exercise sessions take place in hypoxia | A different exposure model; results from residential camps cannot simply be transferred to it |
| Acclimatisation for an altitude race | Prepare for the conditions of the target competition | Readiness in that environment takes priority over a hoped-for sea-level benefit |
These labels do not specify a complete intervention. Altitude, hours of exposure, total duration, training load and the athlete’s health all matter.
Potential benefits are not guarantees
Bonato and colleagues’ 2023 review describes potential physiological and performance benefits of live-high, train-low programmes, alongside substantial variation between methods. Changes in haemoglobin mass are one possible mechanism, but an individual athlete’s performance response is not guaranteed.
The distinction between methods matters. A 2025 systematic review of aerobic intermittent hypoxic training found no additional benefit for maximal oxygen uptake or sea-level aerobic performance compared with equivalent training in normal oxygen conditions. A positive finding for one altitude model is not evidence that every form of hypoxia will improve performance.
Protect training quality and recovery
The opening days should allow you to assess the response to the environment. Do not force sea-level paces simply to complete the written plan. Use perceived effort, breathing, recovery and appropriate measurements together.
Track sleep, appetite, fatigue and how key sessions are performed. Altitude should not become an excuse to accept an extended deterioration in wellbeing. Health concerns or persistent symptoms need qualified assessment, not a harder training stimulus.
Adequate fuelling and an individual medical review where indicated are part of preparation. Iron status can matter, but supplementation should follow assessment and professional advice rather than being an automatic item on a camp checklist.
Is the target altitude readiness, a physiological stimulus or both?
Can the athlete still complete the important training appropriately?
Are sleep, recovery, wellbeing and performance responding acceptably?
How will the return to normal training and the target race be evaluated?
Consider the opportunity cost for an orienteer
A mountain camp with excellent running may offer little relevant orienteering. If the main limitation is unfamiliar terrain, the same time and budget might be better spent learning the target forest and practising decisions at speed.
Combining the two can work when the location and programme support both purposes. It becomes less useful when every session is compromised: too hard for acclimatisation, too slow for the intended physical work and too unfamiliar for productive technical practice.
Plan the return before leaving
Avoid assuming that every athlete peaks on the same day after descent. Use previous individual responses where available and leave room to assess readiness. A physiological measure and a race result are different outcomes; neither should be interpreted without the surrounding training context.
Altitude is a specialised training tool. It earns its place when it contributes more than it costs and fits the athlete’s actual preparation needs.
Further reading
- Bonato, G., Goodman, S. P. J. & Lathlean, T. J. H. (2023). Physiological and performance effects of live high train low altitude training for elite endurance athletes: a narrative review. Current Research in Physiology, 6, 100113.
- Aerobic intermittent hypoxic training is not beneficial for maximal oxygen uptake and performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2025). This review concerns intermittent exercise in hypoxia, not every altitude-training model.